(May 13, 2012 at 11:13 am)genkaus Wrote:(May 13, 2012 at 7:06 am)StatCrux Wrote: No I don't think that majority opinion should be used to define what is right, but without reference to a transcendent truth what else can you use, that is what I am asking. Reason you say? Two men can apply reason and come to polar opposite views, reason depends upon the basic premises of truth being agreed upon, so where do you find these basic premises?
How about finding those premises in objectively observed, natural facts rather than the imaginary "transcendent truth". You base your reason on factual premises and your morals would be objective.
you have already made a disagreeable premise by saying you only want to take natural facts into consideration, that's materialism, your dictating your reality as the basis of the premises before we even start, I don't accept your definition, see the problem?
